DOCSLIB.ORG

A Framework for the Integrated Analysis of the Magnitude, Selectivity, and Biotic Effects of Extinction and Origination

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
A Framework for the Integrated Analysis of the Magnitude, Selectivity, and Biotic Effects of Extinction and Origination Paleobiology, 46(1), 2020, pp. 1–22 DOI: 10.1017/pab.2019.35 Article A framework for the integrated analysis of the magnitude, selectivity, and biotic effects of extinction and origination Andrew M. Bush , Steve C. Wang , Jonathan L. Payne , and Noel A. Heim Abstract.—The taxonomic and ecologic composition of Earth’s biota has shifted dramatically through geologic time, with some clades going extinct while others diversified. Here, we derive a metric that quan- tifies the change in biotic composition due to extinction or origination and show that it equals the product of extinction/origination magnitude and selectivity (variation in magnitude among groups). We also define metrics that describe the extent to which a recovery (1) reinforced or reversed the effects of extinc- tion on biotic composition and (2) changed composition in ways uncorrelated with the extinction. To dem- onstrate the approach, we analyzed an updated compilation of stratigraphic ranges of marine animal genera. We show that mass extinctions were not more selective than background intervals at the phylum level; rather, they tended to drive greater taxonomic change due to their higher magnitudes. Mass extinc- tions did not represent a separate class of events with respect to either strength of selectivity or effect. Simi- lar observations apply to origination during recoveries from mass extinctions, and on average, extinction and origination were similarly selective and drove similar amounts of biotic change. Elevated origination during recoveries drove bursts of compositional change that varied considerably in effect. In some cases, origination partially reversed the effects of extinction, returning the biota toward the pre-extinction com- position; in others, it reinforced the effects of the extinction, magnifying biotic change. Recoveries were as important as extinction events in shaping the marine biota, and their selectivity deserves systematic study alongside that of extinction. Andrew M. Bush. Department of Geosciences and Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of Connecticut, 354 Mansfield Road, Unit 1045, Storrs, Connecticut 06269. E-mail: [email protected] Steve C. Wang. Department of Mathematics and Statistics, Swarthmore College, Swarthmore, Pennsylvania 19081. E-mail: [email protected] Jonathan L. Payne. Department of Geological Sciences, Stanford University, Stanford, California 94305. E-mail: [email protected] Noel A. Heim. Department of Earth and Ocean Sciences, Tufts University, Lane Hall, Medford, Massachusetts 02155. E-mail: [email protected] Accepted: 11 September 2019 Data available from the Dryad Digital Repository: https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.mv97842 Introduction taxonomic or functional groups or with respect to some parameter, such as body size or geo- Paleontologists have studied the dynamics graphic range (e.g., Jablonski and Raup 1995; of extinction and origination in the fossil record Jablonski 1996; Kiessling and Aberhan 2007; in great detail, usually with a focus on the mag- Payne and Finnegan 2007; Rivadeneira and nitude of biodiversity loss or gain (e.g., Newell Marquet 2007; Friedman 2009; Harnik 2011; 1967; Raup and Sepkoski 1982; Benton 1995; Heim and Peters 2011; Powell and MacGregor Bambach 2006; Alroy 2008). However, the 2011; Harnik et al. 2012; Vilhena et al. 2013; effects of mass extinctions on biotic composition Payne et al. 2016b). Selective events will alter and ecosystem structure do not necessarily scale biotic composition, because taxa that experience directly with magnitude, such that magnitude higher extinction magnitude will decline as a is an incomplete measure of an event’simpact proportion of the surviving biota, while those on the history of life (Droser et al. 2000; McGhee that experience lower extinction magnitude et al. 2004, 2012; Christie et al. 2013). Magnitude will increase proportionally (Fig. 1). Extinction and effect can be discordant if extinction events and origination will have a greater effect on vary in selectivity, where selectivity describes composition as either magnitude or selectivity variation in extinction magnitude among increases (Fig. 1) (Payne et al. 2016a). © 2019 The Paleontological Society. All rights reserved. 0094-8373/20 Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. Swarthmore College Libraries, on 27 Feb 2020 at 17:08:19, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/pab.2019.35 2 ANDREW M. BUSH ET AL. marine animals: (1) Are mass extinctions more selective than background intervals, and do they drive more taxonomic change? In other words, does the magnitude of an event predict the strength of its effects on biotic composition (cf. Droser et al. 2000; McGhee et al. 2004, 2012; Christie et al. 2013)? (2) Do mass extinctions form a separate class of events from back- ground intervals with respect to selectivity or effect (cf. Wang 2003)? (3) On average, is extinc- tion more selective than origination, and does it drive greater amounts of taxonomic change? (4) Do changes in biotic composition driven by ori- gination during recoveries reverse or reinforce the changes driven by mass extinction? The FIGURE 1. Simple hypothetical example of extinction answers to these questions will help provide a selectivity with three clades. Numbers indicate species rich- richer view of the ways in which extinction ness before and after an extinction. The combination of high and origination shaped the biosphere through selectivity and high magnitude (bottom right) will lead to large changes in relative taxonomic richness between the geologic time. clades. Methods Patterns of extinction selectivity for individ- Extinction ual events have received considerable atten- We use the per-stage version of Foote’s tion, often as a means of evaluating or boundary-crosser metric for extinction magni- − understanding proposed kill mechanisms tude (cf. Foote 2003): q = ln[xbt/(xbt + xbL)], (e.g., Kitchell et al. 1986; Knoll et al. 1996, where xbt is the number of taxa crossing the bot- 2007; Smith and Jeffery 1998; Lockwood 2003; tom and top boundaries of a time interval and Leighton and Schneider 2008; Powell 2008; xbL is the number that cross only the bottom Clapham and Payne 2011; Alegret et al. 2012; boundary (see Table 1 for a listing of abbrevia- Finnegan et al. 2012; Clapham 2017; Penn tions). The boundary-crosser metric can be et al. 2018). Likewise, selectivity has been eval- standardized by dividing by time-interval dur- uated for a number of parameters across ation (Foote 1999, 2000), which will provide an broader spans of time, permitting comparisons unbiased estimate of the average magnitude of mass extinctions with one another and with during a time interval (Foote 2000). This stand- background intervals (e.g., Payne and Finne- ardization is beneficial if magnitude is constant gan 2007; Janevski and Baumiller 2009; Kies- or does not vary much within time intervals, sling and Simpson 2011; Bush and Pruss 2013; whereas the per-stage metric will increase as Payne et al. 2016a; Reddin et al. 2019). How- interval length increases. However, if extinc- ever, an exact quantitative relationship among tion primarily occurs as pulses within time magnitude, selectivity, and compositional intervals, as argued by Foote (2005), then the change has never been derived. per-stage metric will describe the magnitude Here, we show that the effects of extinction or of those pulses, whereas the time-standardized origination on biotic composition (C), con- metric will vary with interval length (e.g., an strued as change in the proportional diversity extinction pulse would appear half as severe of a set of clades or functional groups, equals if it were in a time interval twice as long). As the product of extinction/origination magni- we are focused mostly on mass extinctions, tude (M ) and selectivity (S) under specificdefi- we use the per-stage metric, but one could nitions of these parameters. We use this also use the standardized version. Real data quantitative framework to examine a series of undoubtedly reflect a mix of pulsed and back- questions about biodiversity dynamics in ground extinction (Stanley 2016), which could Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. Swarthmore College Libraries, on 27 Feb 2020 at 17:08:19, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/pab.2019.35 INTEGRATED ANALYSIS OF EXTINCTION AND ORIGINATION 3 TABLE 1. Definitions of variables. intervals to help ameliorate the potential weak- Variable Definition nesses of the per-stage metric. The framework derived here also applies to xbt Number of genera crossing the bottom and top boundaries of a time interval other metrics that treat extinction on a similar xbL Number of genera crossing only the bottom scale. In particular, Alroy’sgap-filler metric boundary of a time interval (Alroy 2014, 2015) may be preferable, because it xFt Number of genera crossing only the top boundary of a time interval corrects for sampling heterogeneities that may ai Pre-extinction richness of clade i influence the value of q.However,wepresent bi Postextinction richness of clade i the derivation of the method using q, because it qi Extinction magnitude of clade i pi Origination magnitude of clade i is straightforward, and we use q for the prelimin- nQ Number of clades or other groups of interest ary analysis for consistency with the derivation. dext Vector describing change in richness and Magnitude and Change in Composition.—The Q composition due to extinction dorig Vector describing change in richness and boundary-crosser metric q can be rewritten as − Q composition due to origination ln(xbt + xbL) ln(xbt), where xbt + xbL and xbt dnet Vector describing change in richness and composition due to extinction and origination describe pre- and postextinction richness, con- Q Q mext Component of d ext related to change in total sidering the set of taxa that enters a time inter- richness fi Q Q val. For simplicity, we de ne a = ln(xbt + xbL) cext Component of d ext related to change in the − relative richnesses of clades and b = ln(xbt), such that q = a b.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Climate Change and the Selective Signature of the Late Ordovician Mass Extinction
    Climate change and the selective signature of the Late Ordovician mass extinction Seth Finnegana,b,1, Noel A. Heimc, Shanan E. Petersc, and Woodward W. Fischera aDivision of Geological and Planetary Sciences, California Institute of Technology, 1200 East California Boulevard, Pasadena, CA 91125; bDepartment of Integrative Biology, University of California, 1005 Valley Life Sciences Bldg #3140, Berkeley, CA 94720; and cDepartment of Geoscience, University of Wisconsin-Madison, 1215 West Dayton Street, Madison, WI 53706 Edited by Richard K. Bambach, Smithsonian Institution, National Museum of Natural History, Washington, D.C., and accepted by the Editorial Board March 6, 2012 (received for review October 14, 2011) Selectivity patterns provide insights into the causes of ancient ex- sedimentary record (common cause hypothesis) (14). For the tinction events. The Late Ordovician mass extinction was related LOME, it is useful to split common cause into two hypotheses. to Gondwanan glaciation; however, it is still unclear whether ele- The eustatic common cause hypothesis postulates that Gondwa- vated extinction rates were attributable to record failure, habitat nan glaciation drove the extinction by lowering eustatic sea level, loss, or climatic cooling. We examined Middle Ordovician-Early thereby reducing the overall area of shallow marine habitats, Silurian North American fossil occurrences within a spatiotempo- reorganizing habitat mosaics, and disrupting larval dispersal cor- rally explicit stratigraphic framework that allowed us to quantify ridors (16–18). The climatic common cause hypothesis postulates rock record effects on a per-taxon basis and assay the interplay of that climate cooling, in addition to being ultimately responsible macrostratigraphic and macroecological variables in determining for sea-level drawdown and attendant habitat losses, had a direct extinction risk.
    [Show full text]
  • Extent and Duration of Marine Anoxia During the Frasnian– Famennian (Late Devonian) Mass Extinction in Poland, Germany, Austria and France
    This is a repository copy of Extent and duration of marine anoxia during the Frasnian– Famennian (Late Devonian) mass extinction in Poland, Germany, Austria and France. White Rose Research Online URL for this paper: http://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/297/ Article: Bond, D.P.G., Wignall, P.B. and Racki, G. (2004) Extent and duration of marine anoxia during the Frasnian– Famennian (Late Devonian) mass extinction in Poland, Germany, Austria and France. Geological Magazine, 141 (2). pp. 173-193. ISSN 0016-7568 https://doi.org/10.1017/S0016756804008866 Reuse See Attached Takedown If you consider content in White Rose Research Online to be in breach of UK law, please notify us by emailing [email protected] including the URL of the record and the reason for the withdrawal request. [email protected] https://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/ Geol. Mag. 141 (2), 2004, pp. 173–193. c 2004 Cambridge University Press 173 DOI: 10.1017/S0016756804008866 Printed in the United Kingdom Extent and duration of marine anoxia during the Frasnian– Famennian (Late Devonian) mass extinction in Poland, Germany, Austria and France DAVID BOND*, PAUL B. WIGNALL*† & GRZEGORZ RACKI‡ *School of Earth Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds LS2 9JT, UK ‡Department of Palaeontology and Stratigraphy, University of Silesia, ul. Bedzinska 60, PL-41-200 Sosnowiec, Poland (Received 25 March 2003; accepted 10 November 2003) Abstract – The intensity and extent of anoxia during the two Kellwasser anoxic events has been investigated in a range of European localities using a multidisciplinary approach (pyrite framboid assay, gamma-ray spectrometry and sediment fabric analysis).
    [Show full text]
  • The Truong Son, Loei-Phetchabun, and Kontum Terranes in Indochina: Provenance, Rifting, and Collisions
    REVIEW published: 28 May 2021 doi: 10.3389/feart.2021.603565 The Truong Son, Loei-Phetchabun, and Kontum Terranes in Indochina: Provenance, Rifting, and Collisions Clive Burrett 1, Mongkol Udchachon 1,2* and Hathaithip Thassanapak 2 1 Palaeontological Research and Education Centre, Mahasarakham University, Mahasarakham, Thailand, 2 Applied Palaeontology and Biostratigraphy Research Unit, Department of Biology, Faculty of Science, Mahasarakham University, Mahasarakham, Thailand The three main regions of Indochina are defined as the Truong Son, Loei-Phetchabun, and Kontum terranes. The aim of this review is to integrate numerous petrological studies with sedimentary, palaeontological, and provenance studies in order to construct a preliminary tectonic model which shows the terranes docked in the earliest Carboniferous (Truong Son with Loei-Phetchabun) and in the Permian (Kontum). The Kontum Terrane is characterized by Proterozoic magmatism, mid-Ordovician to Early Devonian granites, and Permian charnockites. Major carbonate platforms developed in the Givetian to earliest Tournaisian on Truong Son and from the Visean to mid-Permian across Truong Edited by: Son and Loei-Phetchabun terranes. The Truong Son has Silurian granites and a Basilios Tsikouras, Late Ordovician to Silurian magmatic arc along its southern and western borders Universiti Brunei Darussalam, Brunei caused by subduction of oceanic lithosphere, the remnants of which are now partially Reviewed by: Antonio Pedrera, preserved in the Loei and Tamky sutures. A region to the east of the Loei Suture in Instituto Geológico y Minero de the Loei Foldbelt has a similar-age volcanic arc extending northwards into Laos and España (IGME), Spain Sergio Llana-Fúnez, is included in Truong Son.
    [Show full text]
  • Evaluating the Frasnian-Famennian Mass Extinction: Comparing Brachiopod Faunas
    Evaluating the Frasnian-Famennian mass extinction: Comparing brachiopod faunas PAUL COPPER Copper, P. 1998. Evaluating the Frasnian-Famennian mass extinction: Comparing bra- chiopod faunas.- Acta Palaeontologica Polonica 43,2,137-154. The Frasnian-Famennian (F-F) mass extinctions saw the global loss of all genera belonging to the tropically confined order Atrypida (and Pentamerida): though Famen- nian forms have been reported in the literafure, none can be confirmed. Losses were more severe during the Givetian (including the extinction of the suborder Davidsoniidina, and the reduction of the suborder Lissatrypidina to a single genus),but ońgination rates in the remaining suborder surviving into the Frasnian kept the group alive, though much reduced in biodiversity from the late Earb and Middle Devonian. In the terminal phases of the late Palmatolepis rhenana and P linguifurmis zones at the end of the Frasnian, during which the last few Atrypidae dechned, no new genera originated, and thus the Atrypida were extĘated. There is no evidence for an abrupt termination of all lineages at the F-F boundary, nor that the Atrypida were abundant at this time, since all groups were in decline and impoverished. Atypida were well established in dysaerobic, muddy substrate, reef lagoonal and off-reef deeper water settings in the late Givetian and Frasnian, alongside a range of brachiopod orders which sailed through the F-F boundary: tropical shelf anoxia or hypońa seems implausible as a cause for aĘpid extinction. Glacial-interglacial climate cycles recorded in South Ameńca for the Late Devonian, and their synchronous global cooling effect in low latitudes, as well as loss of the reef habitat and shelf area reduction, remain as the most likely combined scenarios for the mass extinction events.
    [Show full text]
  • Upper Devonian Depositional and Biotic Events in Western New York
    MIDDLE- UPPER DEVONIAN DEPOSITIONAL AND BIOTIC EVENTS IN WESTERN NEW YORK Gordon C. Baird, Dept. of Geosciences, SUNY-Fredonia, Fredonia, NY 14063; D. Jeffrey Over, Dept. of Geological Sciences, SUNY-Geneseo, Geneseo, NY 14454; William T. Kirch gasser, Dept. of Geology, SUNY-Potsdam, Potsdam, NY 13676; Carlton E. Brett, Dept. of Geology, Univ. of Cincinnati, 500 Geology/Physics Bldg., Cincinnati, OH 45221 INTRODUCTION The Middle and Late Devonian succession in the Buffalo area includes numerous dark gray and black shale units recording dysoxic to near anoxic marine substrate conditions near the northern margin of the subsiding Appalachian foreland basin. Contrary to common perception, this basin was often not stagnant; evidence of current activity and episodic oxygenation events are characteristic of many units. In fact, lag deposits of detrital pyrite roofed by black shale, erosional runnels, and cross stratified deposits of tractional styliolinid grainstone present a counter intuitive image of episodic, moderate to high energy events within the basin. We will discuss current-generated features observed at field stops in the context of proposed models for their genesis, and we will also examine several key Late Devonian bioevents recorded in the Upper Devonian stratigraphic succession. In particular, two stops will showcase strata associated with key Late Devonian extinction events including the Frasnian-Famennian global crisis. Key discoveries made in the preparation of this field trip publication, not recorded in earlier literature,
    [Show full text]
  • The Eifelian Givetian Boundary (Middle Devonian) at Tsakhir, Govi Altai Region, Southern Mongolia
    23rd Annual Keck Symposium: 2010 Houston, Texas THE EIFELIAN GIVETIAN BOUNDARY (MIDDLE DEVONIAN) AT TSAKHIR, GOVI ALTAI REGION, SOUTHERN MONGOLIA NICHOLAS SULLIVAN State University of New York at Geneseo Faculty Advisor: D. Jeffrey Over INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE GEOLOGIC SETTING The Devonian System (418.1±3.0 – 365.7±2.7 Ma) Badarch et al. (2002) argued that Mongolia consists is subdivided into three epochs, Lower, Middle, and of numerous terranes that were accreted onto small Upper, which are further subdivided into seven stag- Precambrian cratonic blocks in the Hangay Region es. The Middle Devonian is subdivided into the Eif- during the Paleozoic and Mesozoic. The focus of elian (391.9±3.4 – 388.1±2.6 Ma) and the Givetian this investigation are strata in a region recognized (388.1±2.6 - 383.7±3.1 Ma; Kaufmann, 2006). The as part of one of these accretionary wedges, which stage boundary is defined by the first appearance is referred to as the Gobi Altai Terrane (Figure 1; Ba- of Polygnathus hemiansatus at the Eifelian-Givetian darch et al., 2002; Minjin and Soja, 2009a). Badarch Stage Global Stratotype Section and Point (GSSP), et al. (2002) characterized the Gobi Altai Terrane as which is a section at Jebel Mech Irdane in the Tifilalt a backarc basin, as evidenced by abundant volcano- of Morocco (Walliser et al. 1995). At some sections, clastic sedimentary rocks. The volcanics within the the appearance of the goniatite Maenioceras undu- Gobi Altai Terrane are believed to be derived from latum has been used as a proxy for the boundary a prehistoric island arc represented by the Mandalo- (Kutcher and Schmidt, 1958).
    [Show full text]
  • (Late Devonian) Boundary Within the Foreknobs Formation, Maryland and West Virginia
    The Frasnian-Famennian (Late Devonian) boundary within the Foreknobs Formation, Maryland and West Virginia GEORGE R. McGHEE, JR. Department of Geological Sciences, University of Rochester, Rochester, New York 14627 ABSTRACT The approximate position of the Frasnian-Famennian (Late De- vonian) boundary is determined within the Foreknobs Formation along the Allegheny Front in Maryland and West Virginia by utiliz- ing the time ranges of the articulate brachiopods Athryis angelica Hall, Cyrtospirifer sulcifer (Hall), and members of the Atrypidae. INTRODUCTION The age of strata previously called the "Chemung Formation" along the Allegheny Front in Maryland and West Virginia (Fig. 1) has been of interest to Devonian wokers for some time. Recent at- tempts to resolve this problem include the works of Dennison (1970, 1971) and Curry (1975). New paleontological contribu- tions to the resolution of time relations within the Greenland Gap Group ("Chemung Formation") are the object of this paper, which is an outgrowth of a much larger ecological analysis of Late Devo- nian benthic marine fauna as preserved in the central Appalachians (McGhee, 1975, 1976). STRATIGRAPHIC SETTING The following is a condensation and summary of the evolution of Upper Devonian stratigraphic nomenclatural usage in the study Figure 1. Location map of study area, showing positions of the mea- area; for a more complete and thorough discussion, the reader is sured sections used in this study (after Dennison, 1970). referred to Dennison (1970) and Kirchgessner (1973). The Chemung Formation was originally designated by James lower Cohocton Stage." Elsewhere, concerning the upper limit of Hall (1839) from Chemung Narrows in south-central New York.
    [Show full text]
  • The Ordovician Succession Adjacent to Hinlopenstretet, Ny Friesland, Spitsbergen
    1 2 The Ordovician succession adjacent to Hinlopenstretet, Ny Friesland, Spitsbergen 3 4 Björn Kröger1, Seth Finnegan2, Franziska Franeck3, Melanie J. Hopkins4 5 6 Abstract: The Ordovician sections along the western shore of the Hinlopen Strait, Ny 7 Friesland, were discovered in the late 1960s and since then prompted numerous 8 paleontological publications; several of them are now classical for the paleontology of 9 Ordovician trilobites, and Ordovician paleogeography and stratigraphy. Our 2016 expedition 10 aimed in a major recollection and reappraisal of the classical sites. Here we provide a first 11 high-resolution lithological description of the Kirtonryggen and Valhallfonna formations 12 (Tremadocian –Darriwilian), which together comprise a thickness of 843 m, a revised bio-, 13 and lithostratigraphy, and an interpretation of the depositional sequences. We find that the 14 sedimentary succession is very similar to successions of eastern Laurentia; its Tremadocian 15 and early Floian part is composed of predominantly peritidal dolostones and limestones 16 characterized by ribbon carbonates, intraclastic conglomerates, microbial laminites, and 17 stromatolites, and its late Floian to Darriwilian part is composed of fossil-rich, bioturbated, 18 cherty mud-wackestone, skeletal grainstone and shale, with local siltstone and glauconitic 19 horizons. The succession can be subdivided into five third-order depositional sequences, 20 which are interpreted as representing the SAUK IIIB Supersequence known from elsewhere 21 on the Laurentian
    [Show full text]
  • GEOLOGIC TIME SCALE V
    GSA GEOLOGIC TIME SCALE v. 4.0 CENOZOIC MESOZOIC PALEOZOIC PRECAMBRIAN MAGNETIC MAGNETIC BDY. AGE POLARITY PICKS AGE POLARITY PICKS AGE PICKS AGE . N PERIOD EPOCH AGE PERIOD EPOCH AGE PERIOD EPOCH AGE EON ERA PERIOD AGES (Ma) (Ma) (Ma) (Ma) (Ma) (Ma) (Ma) HIST HIST. ANOM. (Ma) ANOM. CHRON. CHRO HOLOCENE 1 C1 QUATER- 0.01 30 C30 66.0 541 CALABRIAN NARY PLEISTOCENE* 1.8 31 C31 MAASTRICHTIAN 252 2 C2 GELASIAN 70 CHANGHSINGIAN EDIACARAN 2.6 Lopin- 254 32 C32 72.1 635 2A C2A PIACENZIAN WUCHIAPINGIAN PLIOCENE 3.6 gian 33 260 260 3 ZANCLEAN CAPITANIAN NEOPRO- 5 C3 CAMPANIAN Guada- 265 750 CRYOGENIAN 5.3 80 C33 WORDIAN TEROZOIC 3A MESSINIAN LATE lupian 269 C3A 83.6 ROADIAN 272 850 7.2 SANTONIAN 4 KUNGURIAN C4 86.3 279 TONIAN CONIACIAN 280 4A Cisura- C4A TORTONIAN 90 89.8 1000 1000 PERMIAN ARTINSKIAN 10 5 TURONIAN lian C5 93.9 290 SAKMARIAN STENIAN 11.6 CENOMANIAN 296 SERRAVALLIAN 34 C34 ASSELIAN 299 5A 100 100 300 GZHELIAN 1200 C5A 13.8 LATE 304 KASIMOVIAN 307 1250 MESOPRO- 15 LANGHIAN ECTASIAN 5B C5B ALBIAN MIDDLE MOSCOVIAN 16.0 TEROZOIC 5C C5C 110 VANIAN 315 PENNSYL- 1400 EARLY 5D C5D MIOCENE 113 320 BASHKIRIAN 323 5E C5E NEOGENE BURDIGALIAN SERPUKHOVIAN 1500 CALYMMIAN 6 C6 APTIAN LATE 20 120 331 6A C6A 20.4 EARLY 1600 M0r 126 6B C6B AQUITANIAN M1 340 MIDDLE VISEAN MISSIS- M3 BARREMIAN SIPPIAN STATHERIAN C6C 23.0 6C 130 M5 CRETACEOUS 131 347 1750 HAUTERIVIAN 7 C7 CARBONIFEROUS EARLY TOURNAISIAN 1800 M10 134 25 7A C7A 359 8 C8 CHATTIAN VALANGINIAN M12 360 140 M14 139 FAMENNIAN OROSIRIAN 9 C9 M16 28.1 M18 BERRIASIAN 2000 PROTEROZOIC 10 C10 LATE
    [Show full text]
  • Early Carboniferous) Examensarbete Vid Institutionen För Geovetenskaper
    The Tournaisian (Early Carboniferous) Examensarbete vid Institutionen för geovetenskaper Foraminifers From the Kuznetsk Basin ISSN 1650-6553 Nr 303 (South-West Siberia, Russia): Taxonomy, Biometry, Biostratigraphy Clémentine Colpaert The Tournaisian (Early Carboniferous) Foraminifers From the Kuznetsk Basin Revised Tournaisian foraminiferal assemblages of Kuznetsk Basin (Siberia, Russia) provide new accurate stratigraphic correlations for the Taidon and (South-West Siberia, Russia): Fominskoe formations, and palaeobiogeographic hypotheses for western Siberia. Microfacies analyses of Old Belovo Quarry, Artyshta village Section as well as Taxonomy, Biometry, Biostratigraphy Starobachaty village Section reveal four main types of wackestone or packstone with different skeletal grains, some foraminifers and very rare incertae sedis algae. The environments of deposit may be reconstructed as located in distal parts of inner ramps and proximal parts of mid ramp. If the unilocular foraminifer are relatively abundant in all the microfacies, the plurilocular ones occur only in bioclastic neomicrosparitized wackestone deposited in the shallower parts of the carbonate ramp. As the Tournaisian inner ramp is narrow, and only preserved in the Old Belovo Quarry, the Taidon and Fominskoe formations yield quite rare plurilocular Clémentine Colpaert foraminifers. They belong mainly to the superfamily Septabrunsiinoidea, and more precisely to the genera Septabrunsiina and Pseudoplanoendothyra. Rarer Granuliferella and Endothyra are sporadically present. The presence of Granuliferella and some “Devonian” Lazarus-genera allow to correlate the Taidon Formation with the MFZ3 to MFZ5 biozones defined in the Belgian stratotypes, and its top, with Endothyra, to the biozones MFZ5 and/or MFZ6. The Fominskoe Formation, overlain by series previously dated as earliest Viséan, corresponds to the whole late Tournaisian (MFZ6-MFZ8).
    [Show full text]
  • International Chronostratigraphic Chart
    INTERNATIONAL CHRONOSTRATIGRAPHIC CHART www.stratigraphy.org International Commission on Stratigraphy v 2018/08 numerical numerical numerical Eonothem numerical Series / Epoch Stage / Age Series / Epoch Stage / Age Series / Epoch Stage / Age GSSP GSSP GSSP GSSP EonothemErathem / Eon System / Era / Period age (Ma) EonothemErathem / Eon System/ Era / Period age (Ma) EonothemErathem / Eon System/ Era / Period age (Ma) / Eon Erathem / Era System / Period GSSA age (Ma) present ~ 145.0 358.9 ± 0.4 541.0 ±1.0 U/L Meghalayan 0.0042 Holocene M Northgrippian 0.0082 Tithonian Ediacaran L/E Greenlandian 152.1 ±0.9 ~ 635 Upper 0.0117 Famennian Neo- 0.126 Upper Kimmeridgian Cryogenian Middle 157.3 ±1.0 Upper proterozoic ~ 720 Pleistocene 0.781 372.2 ±1.6 Calabrian Oxfordian Tonian 1.80 163.5 ±1.0 Frasnian Callovian 1000 Quaternary Gelasian 166.1 ±1.2 2.58 Bathonian 382.7 ±1.6 Stenian Middle 168.3 ±1.3 Piacenzian Bajocian 170.3 ±1.4 Givetian 1200 Pliocene 3.600 Middle 387.7 ±0.8 Meso- Zanclean Aalenian proterozoic Ectasian 5.333 174.1 ±1.0 Eifelian 1400 Messinian Jurassic 393.3 ±1.2 7.246 Toarcian Devonian Calymmian Tortonian 182.7 ±0.7 Emsian 1600 11.63 Pliensbachian Statherian Lower 407.6 ±2.6 Serravallian 13.82 190.8 ±1.0 Lower 1800 Miocene Pragian 410.8 ±2.8 Proterozoic Neogene Sinemurian Langhian 15.97 Orosirian 199.3 ±0.3 Lochkovian Paleo- 2050 Burdigalian Hettangian 201.3 ±0.2 419.2 ±3.2 proterozoic 20.44 Mesozoic Rhaetian Pridoli Rhyacian Aquitanian 423.0 ±2.3 23.03 ~ 208.5 Ludfordian 2300 Cenozoic Chattian Ludlow 425.6 ±0.9 Siderian 27.82 Gorstian
    [Show full text]
  • International Chronostratigraphic Chart
    INTERNATIONAL CHRONOSTRATIGRAPHIC CHART www.stratigraphy.org International Commission on Stratigraphy v 2014/02 numerical numerical numerical Eonothem numerical Series / Epoch Stage / Age Series / Epoch Stage / Age Series / Epoch Stage / Age Erathem / Era System / Period GSSP GSSP age (Ma) GSSP GSSA EonothemErathem / Eon System / Era / Period EonothemErathem / Eon System/ Era / Period age (Ma) EonothemErathem / Eon System/ Era / Period age (Ma) / Eon GSSP age (Ma) present ~ 145.0 358.9 ± 0.4 ~ 541.0 ±1.0 Holocene Ediacaran 0.0117 Tithonian Upper 152.1 ±0.9 Famennian ~ 635 0.126 Upper Kimmeridgian Neo- Cryogenian Middle 157.3 ±1.0 Upper proterozoic Pleistocene 0.781 372.2 ±1.6 850 Calabrian Oxfordian Tonian 1.80 163.5 ±1.0 Frasnian 1000 Callovian 166.1 ±1.2 Quaternary Gelasian 2.58 382.7 ±1.6 Stenian Bathonian 168.3 ±1.3 Piacenzian Middle Bajocian Givetian 1200 Pliocene 3.600 170.3 ±1.4 Middle 387.7 ±0.8 Meso- Zanclean Aalenian proterozoic Ectasian 5.333 174.1 ±1.0 Eifelian 1400 Messinian Jurassic 393.3 ±1.2 7.246 Toarcian Calymmian Tortonian 182.7 ±0.7 Emsian 1600 11.62 Pliensbachian Statherian Lower 407.6 ±2.6 Serravallian 13.82 190.8 ±1.0 Lower 1800 Miocene Pragian 410.8 ±2.8 Langhian Sinemurian Proterozoic Neogene 15.97 Orosirian 199.3 ±0.3 Lochkovian Paleo- Hettangian 2050 Burdigalian 201.3 ±0.2 419.2 ±3.2 proterozoic 20.44 Mesozoic Rhaetian Pridoli Rhyacian Aquitanian 423.0 ±2.3 23.03 ~ 208.5 Ludfordian 2300 Cenozoic Chattian Ludlow 425.6 ±0.9 Siderian 28.1 Gorstian Oligocene Upper Norian 427.4 ±0.5 2500 Rupelian Wenlock Homerian
    [Show full text]